From Uncyclopedia, the content-free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Article: Subliminal stimuli
|
Score: 1 Message implanted deep into your subconscious.
|
| Nominated by:
|
~  02:31, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
|
For: 6
|
 Self nom + for. Vote for. -- 02:31, September 5, 2011 (UTC)- For. I told you I'd vote. —
 (talk) (contributions) 03:15, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
- For. Where'd all my money go? I understand and I wish to continue.
 . 04:49, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
- For. —Sir Socky
   (talk) (stalk)  GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 07:09, 5 September 2011
- For. Something new! User:DJ Mixerr/sig DJ Mixerr 23:15, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
- For. Very very very very.....very! ShabiDOO 02:30, September 6, 2011 (UTC)
|
Against: 5
|
- Against. Not my cup of tea. Sorry. ~Sir Frosty (Talk to me!)
 07:17, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Against, sorry. -- Sir Mhaille
 (talk to me)
- Er... Do you guys have any suggestions as to how I can make it better, and maybe switch your vote? -- 15:36, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Maybe they didn't like the flashing swastika. —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 16:25, 5 September 2011
- Nazis... -- 16:27, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
- It doesn't really seem done. A decent start, but the article itself just goes for a bit and then stops without really going anywhere, and a lot of the text seems a little... sketchy or something. Not smoothed out. Also, 'subliminal simuli' are not a technique in of themselves - using them would be a technique. 1234 ~
 21:38, 5 September 2011
- If there was a technique where you use subliminal stimuli and you'd call that technique "subliminal stimuli", wouldn't that make the sentence "Subliminal stimuli is a technique" more sensible? And I still insist "in of" doesn't make any sense, as opposed to "in and of" or just "in". —Sir Socky (talk) (stalk) GUN SotM UotM PMotM UotY PotM WotM 11:56, 7 September 2011
 Nope. It's scary.--FcukmanLOOS3R!!! 11:50, September 7, 2011 (UTC)- Against. The concept has promise, but it needs more length and more ha-has. Funky Monk 14:09, September 8, 2011 (UTC)
|
| Comments
|
 OK, here's what. I'm going to abstain for now because, whilst good, this article can be better. My suggestion is to first of all, add some more text/jokes maybe continue the history, like saying the effects of the report on the scientific community and the use of subtle stimuli itself, and maybe a deeper explanation of how subtle stimuli works, and so on. Then you can put the swastika back in (maybe using the technique all these pages with Clippy in them have) and there. A great article with a swastika in it. --EpicAwesomeness (talk) 16:04, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Wait, what do you mean put the swastika back in? It's already there. -- 16:08, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Better? -- 17:11, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
- Keep the swastica..but can you change the frequency of the flashing? Its a little too fast I think --ShabiDOO 02:32, September 6, 2011 (UTC)
- Abstain. I just dunno.
 Mattsnow 11:34, September 7, 2011 (UTC)
|
VFH
← Back to summary VFH
← Back to full VFH
02:31, September 5, 2011 (UTC)
Self nom + for. 
Nope. It's scary.--
OK, here's what. I'm going to abstain for now because, whilst good, this article can be better. My suggestion is to first of all, add some more text/jokes maybe continue the history, like saying the effects of the report on the scientific community and the use of subtle stimuli itself, and maybe a deeper explanation of how subtle stimuli works, and so on. Then you can put the swastika back in (maybe using the technique 
